Forum Help

If you want to ask about changing your username, have login problems, have password problems or a technical issue please email forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com

Posting help:

If you want to ask why a word can't be typed, your signature's been changed, or a post has been deleted see the Forum Rules. If you don't find the answer you can ask forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com though due to volumes we can't guarantee replies.

A group of friends and I play five-a-side football every week on an artificial pitch surface.

Some time into our pre-booked session, parts of the pitch surface started to lift; we reported them raising concerns that if these areas were to get worse they could become trip hazards. Nothing was done. The problem worsened.

After several complaints, we raised on officially, in writing. Still nothing. Two weeks later, a player tripped and was injured. He remained off work for several days as he could not put any weight on the injured leg.

The pitch owners are shrugging it off saying all players are 'advised' to arrange their own insurance.

It is my view that they should be held responsible for not addressing the matter.

Where does the injured party stand in this (obviously not on his injured leg before anyone says it).

The operators of the pitch have a duty under the Occupiers Liability Act 1957 to take all reasonable steps to ensure that those lawfully using their premises are reasonably safe from personal injury. It is relevant to consider the reason why they're there as well, and in this case it obviously extends to ensuring that the pitch is not a trip hazard.

One of the common issues with these sorts of cases is that the occupier was not aware of the hazard prior to the accident, though if your group specifically raised this issue on a number of previous occasions, it may be that the occupier would be in difficulty suggesting that they weren't aware of it. However, there is still far more to these cases than you have mentioned in your opening post. This is really a case that your friend needs to instruct a solicitor in relation to if they want to pursue it further, and as Quentin says that should be a personal injury solicitor taking the case on a no win no fee basis.

“

If your friend realised there was a hazard and continued to play that's contributory negligence.

As above you may find a no win no fee willing to take it on, but it may be thrown out due to that.

by paddyandstumpy”

There may well be contributory negligence for continuing to play on a pitch that he knew was hazardous, but the case won't be 'thrown out' due to that. It may result in a reduction of compensation to one degree or another, but the majority of the fault is still likely to be with the operator of the pitch if they have continued to hire it out with knowledge of the hazard.

There were some attempts to fix the issue, and the management assured us that the surface was fit for purpose. At a glance, it seemed to be OK but after playing on it for 10-15 minutes, the 'glued down' bits curled back up. At this point you decide that it is something you need to speak to the management about again, but it was too late as a short while later one part of the covering popped up and tripped a player.

I can't see that as contributory negligence on the basis that the arena was deemed fit for purpose by the management.

There were some attempts to fix the issue, and the management assured us that the surface was fit for purpose. At a glance, it seemed to be OK but after playing on it for 10-15 minutes, the 'glued down' bits curled back up. At this point you decide that it is something you need to speak to the management about again, but it was too late as a short while later one part of the covering popped up and tripped a player.

I can't see that as contributory negligence on the basis that the arena was deemed fit for purpose by the management.

What you've written here may well help against any allegation of contributory negligence, but it also may have an impact on the claim as a whole, as any attempt to fix the pitch may be seen as a reasonable step until the problem manifested itself again. Then again it may not if the attempt was clearly inadequate. Either way your friend clearly needs to instruct a solicitor if they want to pursue this claim further. Going back and forth on an internet forum isn't going to help.

How this site works

We think it's important you understand the strengths and limitations of the site. We're a journalistic website and aim to provide the best MoneySaving guides, tips, tools and techniques, but can't guarantee to be perfect, so do note you use the information at your own risk and we can't accept liability if things go wrong.

This info does not constitute financial advice, always do your own research on top to ensure it's right for your specific circumstances and remember we focus on rates not service.

Do note, while we always aim to give you accurate product info at the point of publication, unfortunately price and terms of products and deals can always be changed by the provider afterwards, so double check first.

We don't as a general policy investigate the solvency of companies mentioned (how likely they are to go bust), but there is a risk any company can struggle and it's rarely made public until it's too late (see the Section 75 guide for protection tips).

We often link to other websites, but we can't be responsible for their content.

Always remember anyone can post on the MSE forums, so it can be very different from our opinion.

MoneySavingExpert.com is part of the MoneySupermarket Group, but is entirely editorially independent. Its stance of putting consumers first is protected and enshrined in the legally-binding MSE Editorial Code.